I think there are worlds where you should still donate to PauseAI US, and worlds where you shouldn’t; I am not advocating in favor of it, or against it.[1] But I do believe anyone considering doing so should peruse Holly Elmore’s twitter account, since she has declared that “my tweets do represent the worldview PauseAI US is trying to evince” (https://x.com/ilex_ulmus/status/2070746368910520506), and decide whether or not you wish to fund more of those tweets, which appears to be their top leadership priority. Her tweets define PauseAI’s brand in the most consequential nation for AI; you should decide if you want to support that work.
Personally, I have several times asked PauseAI US and Global to stand up against these unwarranted, personal, and line-crossing attacks on me and others that Holly engages in; they have refused to do so. I am tired of it.
I’m not unaware that noting their behavior might shape people’s opinions, but for the record, I have absolutely told some people quite recently that, given their personal values and priorities, donating to PauseAI US makes a lot of sense. I think other members of PauseAI US’s team are decent folks trapped in a bad situation; I know something of what that might feel like.
Given my own personal values and priorities, I personally would absolutely never give PauseAI US a single dollar from my own pocket so long as Holly Elmore is associated with it. Nor would I give PauseAI Global a dollar so long as they keep the same name as her organization and fail to accurately describe how closely the orgs were linked at the beginning (despite their formal independence) in posts like this one.
Hm, I just spent a while reading Holly’s Twitter, and a lot of it appealed to me, especially the recent articles she’s been putting out. I like that her thinking is decorrelated from EA while still having a deep understanding of it.
I don’t necessarily agree with her framing on everything, especially some things she says about people who genuinely care a lot about doing good. But IMO having someone like Holly around is probably net-positive. Trying on the frame “I and/or my friends are complicit in evil by cooperating with/working at AI labs” and noticing where/why it feels uncomfortable or wrong seems like a useful exercise, even if I don’t actually end up believing it. It seems like Holly is playing the role of someone who confronts people with that frame. I don’t know if her particular style of Twitter-dunking is optimal for that goal, but it seems ~fine at least from what I’ve seen. (If she’s said anything especially line-crossing that I might want to know about, feel free to let me know.)
Not sure whether I want to donate to PauseAI US in light of this. Maybe! I’ve been looking for things to donate to that I believe in, but which will not shortly be inundated with Anthropic money. Given Holly’s stance on working for Anthropic, PauseAI US may be an especially good fit for the latter criterion.
Hi Caleb, I’m Alvaro Cuba, the Development Director at PauseAI US (one of 3 employees, the others being Holly and Felix de Simone), and I would be happy to speak with you if you’re considering a donation.
I agree with your articulation of what Holly’s twitter presence is doing, seriously confronting people with our belief that advancing AI capabilities is personally and morally wrong. Even if you don’t end up agreeing with it, I think absent perspectives like hers, most of what people receive on Twitter when they join AI companies is unadulterated praise. Pushing that more toward skepticism has value. In addition to twitter, we do a lot of volunteer group, congressional meeting, and media programming on what has been described as a “shoestring budget.” Below is a snapshot update from April, and please feel free to reach out here or at alvaro@pauseai-us.org
I think this post would have been better than your first comment, since the first comment misses the context of this dispute between you and PauseAI US. It’s very hard to interpret your first comment without this information.
@davekasten why do you think her tweets are their “top leadership priority.” I work at PauseAI US, and the top priority now is mobilizing our volunteers across the country to meet with Congressional Offices in their home districts.
But yes, she does confront people who join AI companies with the idea that it is personally, and morally wrong to do this, especially when the individual believes there is a serious chance the companies will destroy humanity. And I agree with this claim. And I would further extend it not just to the AI researchers, but the sales team and the design team too. All of them could get jobs somewhere else, they are not stuck working at AI companies.
What… are you doing here? This is not a reply to Dave’s comment. Holly of course does much more than “But yes, she does confront people who join AI companies with the idea that it is personally” and this is pretty obviously not what Dave was talking about.
It seems quite clear to me Holly is behaving unacceptably as a representative of at least my interests. Maybe disagree with this characterization, but don’t give this half-assed dishonest deflection. At least try to respond directly!
Alvaro, to be clear, are you defending the highly-personal attacks that Holly has engaged in against me, against Zvi, and against Amanda Askell? And if you endorse those attacks, are you doing so in your personal or professional capacity? Here are some clear examples:
She’s repeatedly and obsessively attacked me for daring to go to a conference that Anthropic employees were at—despite the fact that many, many other AI safety people were there as well. (See, e.g., https://x.com/ilex_ulmus/status/2004416440263164412 ). She has repeatedly claimed that I am equivalent to a supporter of chattel slavery (see, e.g., https://x.com/ilex_ulmus/status/2004660356212269300 ) and does weird creepy pseudo-psychological analyses of my motivations (see that previous tweet, or many of our other interactions; she’s even quoted the Bible at me at one point).
And it’s not just me; for example, her attacks on Amanda Askell were so unwarranted that Eliezer Yudkowsky spoke up to say he opposed them (https://x.com/allTheYud/status/2028747691690242328?s=20), she’s attacked people who work for ARI (some of AI safety’s strongest soldiers on the Hill), etc.
Many people have asked her to stop this behavior, or tried to communicate to PauseAI US and Global why it’s so hard for us to work with all of you when your boss constantly attacks us in such an unwarranted, vile, personal way. And despite that, I still tell people that PauseAI US is worth donating to if it matches their values, because I’m trying very hard to avoid her bruising personal attacks to affect my values and beliefs. And frankly, it’s especially shitty in that context that you, who are (at least according to LinkedIn), the Development Director for PauseAI US, stick up for your boss treating me so awfully.
This additional info was very helpful to understand your view. Maybe you could have included it earlier and not just in your second reply. I first thought you were just pissed that Holly criticizes you when in fact your problem with her is the hurtful and unfair way in which she communicates those criticisms.
I get the impression from your first reply that you think that this is immediately obvious when one looks at her twitter profile. To me, it wasn’t. And @Caleb Biddulph’s reply looks to me like it also wasn’t obvious to Caleb.
I think there are worlds where you should still donate to PauseAI US, and worlds where you shouldn’t; I am not advocating in favor of it, or against it.[1] But I do believe anyone considering doing so should peruse Holly Elmore’s twitter account, since she has declared that “my tweets do represent the worldview PauseAI US is trying to evince” (https://x.com/ilex_ulmus/status/2070746368910520506), and decide whether or not you wish to fund more of those tweets, which appears to be their top leadership priority. Her tweets define PauseAI’s brand in the most consequential nation for AI; you should decide if you want to support that work.
Personally, I have several times asked PauseAI US and Global to stand up against these unwarranted, personal, and line-crossing attacks on me and others that Holly engages in; they have refused to do so. I am tired of it.
I’m not unaware that noting their behavior might shape people’s opinions, but for the record, I have absolutely told some people quite recently that, given their personal values and priorities, donating to PauseAI US makes a lot of sense. I think other members of PauseAI US’s team are decent folks trapped in a bad situation; I know something of what that might feel like.
Given my own personal values and priorities, I personally would absolutely never give PauseAI US a single dollar from my own pocket so long as Holly Elmore is associated with it. Nor would I give PauseAI Global a dollar so long as they keep the same name as her organization and fail to accurately describe how closely the orgs were linked at the beginning (despite their formal independence) in posts like this one.
Hm, I just spent a while reading Holly’s Twitter, and a lot of it appealed to me, especially the recent articles she’s been putting out. I like that her thinking is decorrelated from EA while still having a deep understanding of it.
I don’t necessarily agree with her framing on everything, especially some things she says about people who genuinely care a lot about doing good. But IMO having someone like Holly around is probably net-positive. Trying on the frame “I and/or my friends are complicit in evil by cooperating with/working at AI labs” and noticing where/why it feels uncomfortable or wrong seems like a useful exercise, even if I don’t actually end up believing it. It seems like Holly is playing the role of someone who confronts people with that frame. I don’t know if her particular style of Twitter-dunking is optimal for that goal, but it seems ~fine at least from what I’ve seen. (If she’s said anything especially line-crossing that I might want to know about, feel free to let me know.)
Not sure whether I want to donate to PauseAI US in light of this. Maybe! I’ve been looking for things to donate to that I believe in, but which will not shortly be inundated with Anthropic money. Given Holly’s stance on working for Anthropic, PauseAI US may be an especially good fit for the latter criterion.
Hi Caleb, I’m Alvaro Cuba, the Development Director at PauseAI US (one of 3 employees, the others being Holly and Felix de Simone), and I would be happy to speak with you if you’re considering a donation.
I agree with your articulation of what Holly’s twitter presence is doing, seriously confronting people with our belief that advancing AI capabilities is personally and morally wrong. Even if you don’t end up agreeing with it, I think absent perspectives like hers, most of what people receive on Twitter when they join AI companies is unadulterated praise. Pushing that more toward skepticism has value. In addition to twitter, we do a lot of volunteer group, congressional meeting, and media programming on what has been described as a “shoestring budget.” Below is a snapshot update from April, and please feel free to reach out here or at alvaro@pauseai-us.org
https://www.pauseai-us.org/2026q2donorupdate/
Remember, PauseAI US is distinct from PauseAI Global! That’s why they fundraise on PauseAI Global posts...wait, I think I missed something
I think this post would have been better than your first comment, since the first comment misses the context of this dispute between you and PauseAI US. It’s very hard to interpret your first comment without this information.
@davekasten why do you think her tweets are their “top leadership priority.” I work at PauseAI US, and the top priority now is mobilizing our volunteers across the country to meet with Congressional Offices in their home districts.
But yes, she does confront people who join AI companies with the idea that it is personally, and morally wrong to do this, especially when the individual believes there is a serious chance the companies will destroy humanity. And I agree with this claim. And I would further extend it not just to the AI researchers, but the sales team and the design team too. All of them could get jobs somewhere else, they are not stuck working at AI companies.
What… are you doing here? This is not a reply to Dave’s comment. Holly of course does much more than “But yes, she does confront people who join AI companies with the idea that it is personally” and this is pretty obviously not what Dave was talking about.
It seems quite clear to me Holly is behaving unacceptably as a representative of at least my interests. Maybe disagree with this characterization, but don’t give this half-assed dishonest deflection. At least try to respond directly!
Alvaro, to be clear, are you defending the highly-personal attacks that Holly has engaged in against me, against Zvi, and against Amanda Askell? And if you endorse those attacks, are you doing so in your personal or professional capacity? Here are some clear examples:
Perhaps somehow the item above about Holly making it clear that her tweets are PauseAI US’s strategy (https://x.com/ilex_ulmus/status/2070746368910520506) is insufficient. On many other occasions, Holly insists that she will “continue to berate” (https://x.com/ilex_ulmus/status/2021384678205444511) others and that she will be “merciless” (https://x.com/ilex_ulmus/status/2024337483572662487) in doing so.
She’s repeatedly and obsessively attacked me for daring to go to a conference that Anthropic employees were at—despite the fact that many, many other AI safety people were there as well. (See, e.g., https://x.com/ilex_ulmus/status/2004416440263164412 ). She has repeatedly claimed that I am equivalent to a supporter of chattel slavery (see, e.g., https://x.com/ilex_ulmus/status/2004660356212269300 ) and does weird creepy pseudo-psychological analyses of my motivations (see that previous tweet, or many of our other interactions; she’s even quoted the Bible at me at one point).
And it’s not just me; for example, her attacks on Amanda Askell were so unwarranted that Eliezer Yudkowsky spoke up to say he opposed them (https://x.com/allTheYud/status/2028747691690242328?s=20), she’s attacked people who work for ARI (some of AI safety’s strongest soldiers on the Hill), etc.
Many people have asked her to stop this behavior, or tried to communicate to PauseAI US and Global why it’s so hard for us to work with all of you when your boss constantly attacks us in such an unwarranted, vile, personal way. And despite that, I still tell people that PauseAI US is worth donating to if it matches their values, because I’m trying very hard to avoid her bruising personal attacks to affect my values and beliefs. And frankly, it’s especially shitty in that context that you, who are (at least according to LinkedIn), the Development Director for PauseAI US, stick up for your boss treating me so awfully.
This additional info was very helpful to understand your view. Maybe you could have included it earlier and not just in your second reply. I first thought you were just pissed that Holly criticizes you when in fact your problem with her is the hurtful and unfair way in which she communicates those criticisms.
I get the impression from your first reply that you think that this is immediately obvious when one looks at her twitter profile. To me, it wasn’t. And @Caleb Biddulph’s reply looks to me like it also wasn’t obvious to Caleb.